Survey Results and my use of ‘BREAKING’ on tweets

First off – Happy New Year. The reopening of the hacking trial today brought with it some (I thought) quite interesting revelations, but obviously I try to tweet every argument and point without prejudice, and don’t make an editorial judgement of interesting/boring etc. However, one decision I occasionally take is to call a tweet BREAKING.

For transparency, my editorial judgement then is a pretty snap judgement (unless some major news has been flagged up in advance in legal argument). Generally, I flag up something as ‘breaking’ if a) it’s news to me or b) entered as evidence for the first time. Though I’ve written a book about the phone hacking scandal and dozens of published articles, I certainly don’t know everything – and something new to me might not be to others. It’s also a relative decision. On a busy day in court, I might miss a real revelation: on a slower day something minor can appear big.

And of course, we are about a month away from the close of the prosecution case: so the breaking news favours the crown’s case. I have made some defence examination points a ‘breaking status’ (e.g. Anthony Langdale’s assertion that Coulson’s “Do his phone email” referred to NOTW reporter Rav Singh) but until the defendants mount their cases, things are heavily tilted in favour of the prosecution news.

Survey Results

A week or so ago, prior to seeking new funds to finance my phone hacking trial live coverage till the end of the trial (expected now sometime in May) I emailed subscribers and posted a link to a survey about what you wanted from my coverage. About half the original supporters replied – which is actually a pretty good response, especially over a holiday.

While I’ll keep the survey open in case anyone missed it, for the sake of transparency, here are the results so far:

Question 1: Thank you for supporting my live tweeting from the phone hacking trial at the Old Bailey. The funding has allowed to me continue minute by minute reports from Court 12, and compile my tweets and other evidence on my blog http://www.fothom.wordpress.com. There are other regular legal arguments, not heard by the jury, which occupy other days, which can only be reported when the trial is over. The hacking trial is now expected to last till around mid May. Should I seek crowdfunding to continue covering the trial this way?

• Yes, please continue with this level of coverage: 98.80%
• No, you provide too much detail on the hacking trial. 1.20%
• No, you don’t provide enough detail on the hacking trial 0%
• I’ve lost interest in the subject : 0%

2. For the previous crowdfunding there were ‘perks’ for different levels of contribution – including exclusive access to my some parts of my blog, a free ebook of Fall of the House of Murdoch, and a dedicated lunch or tour. Did you subscribe to a perk?* (*Perks are pretty much a required element in crowd funding)

• Yes 27.16%
• No 69.14%
• Can’t Remember 3.70%

3. For future fundraising for livetweeting the hacking trial, are they any other perks you can think of? For example I could offer after dinner speaking on the phone hacking scandal for individuals or groups. Or perhaps a weekly email update from the court. All suggestions helpful

Top Suggestions by number of mentions

• 1. Weekly Newsletter or podcast
• 2. Just happy following current live tweets
• 3. Workshops, after dinner speech or lectures at end of trial – specifically journalism students
• 4. New book as a sequel to The Fall of the House of Murdoch

I’ll shortly be launching my last push to finance covering the trial till its conclusion – and these suggestions have really helped shape what I can offer in return for your support. Thanks